The Belfry Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question; Assessing needs, delivering evidence-based care and treatment, how staff, teams and services work together and Consent to care and treatment. We found that people were involved in their care and their consent to receive care was sought by staff and the management team. Where people could not consent to care, the appropriate legislative processes had been followed. People had their needs assessed thoroughly before care commenced and were involved in how their care would be delivered. People told us care was consistent and they were asked for their consent before care began or changes were made to their care.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The registered manager carried out assessments of people’s care and support needs prior to their admission at The Belfry. People’s care plans were developed with input from people using the service and their relative’s input. Care plans contained detailed information regarding their care and support requirements.

The registered manager told us, “Most of our referrals are by word of mouth, we get a lot of recommendations. We offer people the choice of whether they want to have a home visit or visit the service. We offer lunch and will carry out an assessment of the person whilst they are here.”

People and their relatives told us their care needs were assessed prior to their admission to the Belfry. One person told us, “They [staff] came to the house to carry out an assessment before I moved in.” A relative told us, “We had an assessment and went through everything. [Name] has a care plan; they have a specific routine. I am always involved. They (staff) call me and discuss any issues.”

Staff told us the menu planner was prepared with people’s input following a resident meeting that was held. We could see from the minutes of the last resident meeting that people had made suggestions regarding what they would like to see more of in the menu choices. This was being incorporated into the daily menus. A staff member told us, “We record people’s food and fluid intake and get to know what they like and do not like.”

Although there was no one at the service on a modified diet, referrals had been made via the GP to external services such as the dietician to support with people’s weight loss. Where required people had malnutrition risk assessments in place detailing guidance and advice from the dietician. People’s food and fluid intake was recorded, and those whose weight remained low or had lost weight were weighed weekly for monitoring purposes. Fortified meals were prepared and milkshake supplements high in calorific value had been prescribed where required.

People received a balanced nutritional diet and national guidance was followed to ensure weight management was effective. Relatives we spoke to told us how the service had been proactive in identifying weight loss in their family members and what actions they were taking. One relative told us, “The food here I could eat myself; it is cooked fresh. They [staff] are encouraging [family member] to eat, they were on it straight away and followed it up. They [staff] got the doctor in as [family member] was not eating.” Most people were happy and satisfied with the meal choices on offer. One person told us, “The meals are good and filling, I don’t need a menu, they [staff] know what I don’t like.” Another person told us, “It would be nice to have a chef in place, the girls [staff] do all the cooking, sometimes it’s a bit hit and miss.”

Feedback we received from other healthcare professionals was extremely positive. Comments included, “The team are very responsive whether you are calling – the phone is always answered and taken immediately to whoever is in charge that day - or when attending - met at the door, signed in and taken to the patient. They know their patients well, treat them with compassion and are looking to go above and beyond in terms of care offered,” “All the staff I came in contact with within the home are very caring, professional and conscientious. I found the residents happy, busy and well cared for. Record keeping is excellent at the Belfry as there is a great emphasis on staff training and documentation.” And “My experience of working with the Belfry could not be more positive. All the staff I have come in contact with are very caring, professional and conscientious. I found the residents happy, busy and well cared for. I would have no problem recommending the care home to my own family and friends and cannot praise the organisation enough. I have spent a good deal of time speaking to the residents, who all sing the praises of the caring staff. The Belfry is certainly well run and well-led, with all the emphasis on residents and relatives.”

People and relatives, we spoke to told us how effectively the registered manager and staffing team liaised with other health care services to ensure they or their family member received good quality care and prompt treatment.

A member of staff told us, “The senior would ring the GP, or any professional people would need. Everyone has access to all professionals. For dentist appointments family tend to take them.”

We found there to be good working relationships between external professionals and the management team at The Belfry. The service was proactive in ensuring people’s healthcare needs were met and this included a weekly ward round carried out by the GP surgery which enabled them to discuss any health concerns they had regarding people using the service to ensure they received the appropriate treatment.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us they received a choice about their care and treatment. Comments included, “The staff are very helpful and caring. It is always my choice as to whether I want to participate in things, such as activities.” And “They (staff) ask my permission and consent when helping me.” A relative told us, “Yes, they (staff) tell [family member] what they are about to do as they are bedbound and need to be rolled onto their side. The staff position [family member] comfortably so they can see the TV.”

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We found the service had completed some MCA’s where required and were in the process of reviewing each person to ensure all appropriate MCAs were in place relating to specific decisions. Appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty. Any conditions related to DoLS authorisations were being met.

Staff were aware of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and were able to describe how they apply this in their day to day practice. Comments included, “It is about whether people can make a decision. I give people an option about what they would like. For example, [Name of person] is unable to make a choice; I speak to other colleagues, and we know [Name of person] likes and dislikes,” “[Name of staff member] completes the capacity assessments; when someone does not have capacity for example [Name of person], we speak to them and offer a couple of options so we choose things we think they might like. “And “I help people with their decision making without influence, people are still able to make a decision. I would go to a senior for advice if I needed to.”